Most practical engineering systems design problems have multiple and conflicting objectives. Furthermore, the satisfactory attainment level for each objective ( requirement ) is likely uncertain early in the design process. Systems with long design cycle times will exhibit more of this uncertainty throughout the design process. This is further complicated if the system is expected to perform for a relatively long period of time, as now it will need to grow as new requirements are identified and new technologies are introduced. These points identify a need for a systems design technique that enables decision making amongst multiple objectives in the presence of uncertainty. Traditional design techniques deal with a single objective or a small number of objectives that are often aggregates of the overarching goals sought through the generation of a new system. Other requirements, although uncertain, are viewed as static constraints to this single or multiple objective optimization problem. With either of these formulations, enabling tradeoffs between the requirements, objectives, or combinations thereof is a slow, serial process that becomes increasingly complex as more criteria are added. This research proposal outlines a technique that attempts to address these and other idiosyncrasies associated with modern aerospace systems design. The proposed formulation first recasts systems design into a multiple criteria decision making problem. The now multiple objectives are decomposed to discover the critical characteristics of the objective space. Tradeoffs between the objectives are considered amongst these critical characteristics by comparison to a probabilistic ideal tradeoff solution. The proposed formulation represents a radical departure from traditional methods. A pitfall of this technique is in the validation of the solution: in a multi-objective sense, how can a decision maker justify a choice between non-dominated alternatives? A series of examples help the reader to observe how this technique can be applied to aerospace systems design and compare the results of this so-called Decomposition-Based Decision Making to more traditional design approaches.